Landscapes - Mamiya 7II vs Pentax 67II

[m_burghardt]

I am switching from 6x6 format to 6x7. I only shoot at sunrise or

sunset, low light conditions. I always use a tripod, and use wide

angle lenses focussed at infinity. My shots range from five minutes

to 1/10 a second, rarely do I go over that. I am not concerned with

bulk or weight. I am trying to decide between the Mamiya 7ii and the

Pentax 67II. I want the best quality for large prints 16x20

++.without going to 4x5.

 

I have read that the Pentax, even with MLU, has problem with mirror/

shutter shack. This makes me nervous. However the camera and wide

angle lenses are cheaper.

 

The 7II lenses are twice as expensive, but if it meant not putting

weights on top of my camera it would be worth it.

 

What other things should I consider? I am planning on only using

this camera for landscape photography. Thanks for the help.

[35mmdelux]

you sound like a prime candidate for the Fuji 6x9. Good luck, Paul

[eric friedemann]

Well, I love my Mamiya 7IIs. However, I don't use them primarily for landscape photography and I am concerned with bulk and weight- a key reason I switched over from a Mamiya RZ system.

 

 

You mention that you only shoot at sunrise or sunset, in low light conditions. Sunrise and sunset shots with the potentially extreme differences in brightness above and below the horizon line would indicate to me a need to shoot rectangular, adjustable gradient filters. This, in turn, would suggest an SLR camera as it is practically impossible to adjust gradient filters when using a rangefinder camera.

 

 

If you aren't bothered by bulk and weight and are leary of the Pentax 67II's mirror/shutter shake, buy RZ equipment (I would note that I've shot Pentax 67 equipment on a number of occasions and it isn't that much smaller or lighter than RZ stuff). RZ-variant cameras can be shot in a two-stage, mirror-up manner and all the lenses have leaf shutters (no focal plane shutter). Also, RZ equipment can be found used at reasonable prices.

[elliot_n]

'you sound like a prime candidate for the Fuji 6x9'

 

I don't think so.

 

There's no 'B' setting on the Fuji 69.

 

There's a 'T' setting that keeps the

shutter open, but to release the shutter you have to turn the shutter speed ring on the

lens. This makes the camera less than ideal (camera shake) if you are shooting exposures

of between 1 second (the camera's slowest shutter speed) and, say, 20 seconds...

[dean_tomasula1]

The Mamiya lenses are sharper than the Pentax's. But they're both very capable cameras for this application.

[andrewlamb]

The best quality is most likely to come from a technical camera, like a Linhof,

a Horsman or even an Alpa. The latter is mind boggingly expensive.

 

However, the point is that with these cameras you can use Schneiders,

Rodenstocks etc which I think would perform better than either Mamiya or

Pentax lenses.

 

Price wise, these lenses are fairly competitive and, of course, they have leaf

shutters so you don't have to worry about putting weights on your camera.

[tarashnat]

" There's no 'B' setting on the Fuji 69.

 

There's a 'T' setting that keeps the shutter open, but to release the shutter you have to

turn the shutter speed ring on the lens. This makes the camera less than ideal (camera

shake) if you are shooting exposures of between 1 second (the camera's slowest shutter

speed) and, say, 20 seconds... "

 

One can always use the "hat trick" : cover the lens with a black cloth or any other opaque

item, then turn the shutter speed ring. This trick is used by astrophotographers quite

often.

 

Taras

[mike_earussi1]

I second Eric's comments. The Mamiya 7II certainly has the highest quality lenses but doing landscapes absolutely requires a graduated ND filter which requires an slr camera, so I would go with the RZ which has better lenses than the pentax.

[mike_earussi1]

Actually, let me change that to the RB II instead which uses leaf shutter lenses (which cause no camera shake at all vs. the RZ which uses a focal plane shutter and can cause shake). They both have equally good lenses.

[eric friedemann]

I could go along with Mike on an RB. I owned RB stuff before I owned RZ stuff and was quite pleased with the RB 50mm f/4.5- see tomb image shot with RB 50mm here:

 

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/nw-fetch-msg?msg_id=00DSMg

 

 

One reason I might consider an RB Pro SD over an RZ is that- after I sold my RB stuff, Mamiya introduced a motorized 6x8 cm (56x76 mm) back for the RB that accepts 120 or 220 film- not quite 6x9 cm, but a little more longitude for landscape shots:

 

 

http://www.mamiya.com/products2.asp?id=1&id2=15&id3=40&id4=423&id5=424

[eric friedemann]

Mike, the RZ Pro IIs I was using didn't have a focal plane shutter in sight.

[l_a_k_h_i_n_d_e_r]

Not concerned about weight! Then go to Fuji GX680. You get the movements of a 4x5. And everything else a SLR will do.

[eric friedemann]

The movements on the Fuji 680s are swell and its a beautiful system. However, to accomodate the movements, the lenses are big- ergo pricey- to project big image circles and have filter sizes of 82mm and up- ouch! You pay a premium for view camera movements with the GX-680 system.

[gustav1]

Well.. I'm using a pentax 67 (mlu, not II) with 90 and 55 and the quality is stunning. Cheap and not really so large. If you want quality you're already using a tripod. An EOS 1ds with 16-35 and 70-200 is about the same weight with all hd-backups etc. It's easy to modify if you find battery drainage to be a problem. Me I'm running my second battery right now (bought the beauty in 2002) so it's not a problem. 2.8 vs 4 can be something you wanna consider and ttl-viewing might also be nice in landscape-photography.

Come join us at the "pentax 67 fourm"!!

[hakon_soreide]

If bulk is not an issue, but shutter shake is, another interesting option will be to get a 4x5 camera. I know you said you didn't want one, but think about it: they are cheap second-hand, so are good quality lenses, they can even weigh significantly less than a Pentax 67II with lenses, and you can use rollfilm back for them (6x7, 6x9, 6x12 - some even take 6x17 backs) if it is - as I assume - using 4x5 <i>film</i>, and not the cameras <i>per se</i>, that is your reason for wanting a medium format camera instead. Also you get those camera movements that will change the way you take landscape pictures. Hopefully for the better.<p>

Also, doing polaroids to check exposure is easy, and you have the additional option of actually shooting some 4x5 from time to time.<p>

Hakon Soreide<br>

Bergen, Norway<br>

<a href="http://www.hakonsoreide.com">www.hakonsoreide.com</a>

[tom_westbrook]

One thing that I don't think anyone else mentioned: I've heard before that the battery holds the Mamiya 7 shutter open, so if you're doing multiple long exposures, bring extra batteries and prepare to live with the shutter closing unexpectedly if the battery dies mid-exposure. I don't tend to do long exposures with mine, so can't say if that's a big problem.

[svein_erik1]

>mike earussi , oct 11, 2005; 03:16 p.m.

>Actually, let me change that to the RB II instead which uses leaf shutter lenses (which

>cause no camera shake at all vs. the RZ which uses a focal plane shutter and can cause

>shake). They both have equally good lenses.

 

There is no focalplane shutter on the Rz. It only uses leafshutters in the lenses, and its one

of the primary reasons its so popular in commercial shooting with strobes and high sync

speed (..together with the rotating back and nice format for pagelayout).

[david_henderson]

I use both a 6x6 and Mamiya 7 for landscapes. Whilst the Mamiya is invaluable to me, and the lenses are extremely sharp, it isn't able to handle all landscape opportunities. The issue with grads is valid (though I find a screw-in glass 2 stop by Heliopan to be better than nothing). Also important is the fact that you can't see depth of field TTL if you like near/far type compositions and the fact that the lenses don't focus closely enough for the kind of close-up intimate landscape or rockscape I like to make alongside the more sweeping stuff. Finally, framing of the Mamiya isn't terribly exact and until you get good at guessing the real framing you'll find all sorts of interesting things round the edge of your frame that you thought were out. In short I find the slr to be more versatile and facilitates more control over the image.

 

Frankly both of these cameras will eat 20" x 16" with any good print making process, so your choice shouldn't in my opinion be based on spurious print quality issues, but rather on which camera allows you to shoot the type of images you want most easily.

[troyammons]

Whats wrong with 4x5. Its sounds like its exactly what you would want to shoot.

 

I also have owned the M7 and P67 and they are both good cameras. I found the P67 lenses to vary in sharpness a great degree. The best P67 lens I used was the latest 300mm F4 EDIF lens. Superb, and one of the sharpest lenses I have ever used even WO including 35mm lenses.

 

As far as strictly landscapes I think the M7 was better of the two, but for critical focus the P67II was better, but the cost of lenses for the M7 even used was astronomical.

 

At the time I shot the M7 I had shot the M67RZ, RBpro, P67II etc and I felt the M7 was the sharpest of the bunch, but in general everyday shooting they were about the same with an edge to the M7.

 

I shot the M7 against a Sinar 4x5 with a rodenstock 150mm lens and although the M7 captured most of the detail of the 4x5, I felt that the 4x5 yeilded so much cleaner detail in scans than the M7, on a tripod it was very much worth the extra effort.

 

Also that rod 150mm lens was not as sharp as the one I use now.

 

For a backpack trip the lightweight M7 would be the winner. The P67 is a beast.

 

Its really not a good comparison considering one is a RF and one is a SLR. Totally different camera, but for overall landscape image quality I would say go for 4x5.

[rj]

If I were contemplating your decision I would go with the pentax 67II just because of the fact that it is an slr therefore you can use grad filters correctly, which in my opinion are essential to landscape photography. I really don't think that either of these cameras can be faulted for image quality, but a rangefinder system, however good and lightweight, is still a rangefinder.

 

I would seriously consider a lightweight viewcamera for the work you are describing, possibly a 4x5 with a roll film holder or maybe even a 6x9 or 2x3 viewcamera that would give you incredible quality with movements, the important ones being tilt, swing rise and fall. Horseman makes a camera called the VH in 6x9, along with Ebony, Arca Swiss and Linhoff. I honestly think you would get exceptional image quality to way above 16x20 with a Crown Graphic and a modern 90mm f8 lens say from Nikkor. The Crown can be had for 150 bucks, the lens about 500 and film holders about another 100. The crown has limited movements, but the small amount it does have can be a huge help getting things into focus.

[m_burghardt]

Thank you for the feedback thus far. Sounds like I should be looking into the mamiya RZ

or

RB 67?

 

But am confused by some of the feedback. Do both systems operate with leaf shutters

in the lenses? Therefor there will be no shutter shack? Why the need to have mirror lock up

option then?

 

RB 67 vs RZ67 ? which is better for what i am doing? Is 50mm the widest lens available? i

read that is is equivalent to a 24mm in 35mm? Is this right?

[george_rhodes]

I have never used a Mamiya 7II, but a fellow fine art photographer I know well, who uses one to shoot primarily landscapes, achieves stunning results with his system. Since it is a rangefinder, he has no mirror/shutter shake issues, but it isn't the easiest camera to use graduated neutral density filters or a polarizer with. The Mamiya camera and lenses are smaller than their Pentax counterparts, but there are fewer lens options with the mamiya. I shoot primarily landscapes with a Pentax 67, always on a tripod, using mirror lockup. When using wide angle lenses and locking up the mirror, I have never had a problem with mirrror/shutter shake. That has never been an issue in my shooting, until I get up over 100mm. I know how to compensate for shutter/mirror vibration in what many consider to be the problem range of shutter speeds with longer lenses anyway, so that is not an issue in my shooting. I'm known among my peers to be neurotic about achieving critically sharp images. I consistantly produce very sharp 24" X 30" prints with my Pentax lenses. Other photographers consistantly rave about the sharp resolution of my prints. The lenses I use are all extremely sharp. I use the 45mm f4, 75mm f4.5, 90-180mm f5.6 and 300mm f4 ED lenses. The zoom is amazingly sharp and the 300mm f4 exhibits absolutely stunning performance, in case you would ever want something besides a wide angle. Pentax also makes a critically acclaimed 55mm-100mm wide angle lens. If I were you, before I made a decision on which system to go with, I'd borrow or rent both cameras with a wide angle lens and try them out. The Pentax would certainly be less expensive than the Mamiya.

[photom]

Of course Mamiya RB and RZ have leaf shutters in lenses only - no focal plane shutter (he must have been thinking of the Pentax).

 

Mirror lock-up is to get around the shake caused by the mirror slamming up in SLRs. Nothing to do with shutters.

[victor_moss]

I shoot both M7ii and RB. I use M7 primarily when weight is an issue and/or if I want to handhold shots. Although both an SLR and M7 will work, I would probably have picked an SLR for your stated purpose. Apart from slightly better flare resistance from the M7 lenses I cannot think of any pros for using M7 (again, in your situation). Theoretically, rangefinder wides are supposed to be better. But 65mm and above I don't see much practical difference in my prints between the M7 lenses and the K/L lenses, at least up to 20x24" prints (tripod mounted and with mirror up - reverses dramatically if handheld).

 

With an SLR (I am thinking RBs!) you get much better framing, don't have to worry about tripod stability in vertical orientation, no battery issues (M7 consumes battery in bulb mode) and an overall more versatile system (close focus is a big plus for me). By the way, I don't think ND grads is that big an issue if you print digitally. I much prefer the flexibility of compositing multiple images, even though it is much more cumbersome and time consuming. But that is only me.

 

If you decide on RB, be careful when you buy the 50mm. I did not have good luck so far, still looking. The RZ has two versions for the 50mm - W and ULD - both have excellent reputation. Yes, it is roughly comparable to 24mm, using diagonal angle of view. There is also a 37mm C fisheye lens for the RB, but I have no experience with it.

 

Finally, both RB and RZ have leaf shutters and so does M7. This is independent of mirror slap, which is of course absent in M7.

[tad doxsee]

One of the main reasons I choose the Mamiya 7II was portability. If you'll never carry your camera far, then I suppose that shouldn't be an issue. I carry mine with two lenses and several filters backpacking in a chest harness bag.

 

Using a polarizer isn't hard but the grad filter is a challenge.

 

Because I can't preview the depth of field I find the distance of the nearest object in the frame by focussing on that (easy) then I adjust the focus to ensure that it and infinity are within the depth of field indicators on the lens. I try to be conservative by at least one f stop. That usually works for me.

 

If you're still considering the M7II, I hope that helps.